IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(EXTRAORDINARY WRIT JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mohammad Rustam Khan ….….Petitioner

Versus

ADDITONAL CUSTOM COMMISIONER, IGI AIRPORT

…..Respondent

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SEEKING ISSUANCE OF
WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPOROPRIATE
WRIT THEREBY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO
DECIDE THE MATTER IN TIME BOUND MANNER.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the pax i.e. Mr Mohmmad Rustam arrived to IGI

Airport Terminal-3, New Delhi by flight No. A1 926 where
he was intercepted by a custom officer at the exit gate and
diverted for detailed examination of his baggage and one
yellow metal bar appearing of gold weighing 250 gm was
found.
2. That the respondent is Additional Custom Commissioner,
IGIA Airport, New Delhi and while performing the duty and
giving any order in pursuance of the duty he should keep
the concerned provisions in his mind and his decision
should not violate any of the natural justice principles.
3. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the order C.No.
VIII/WH/242/DR/2016-17 given by the Respondent dated
05/12/2017 imposing a penalty of Rs 1,20,000/-under
 Section 111 and section 112 of the customs Act.
Annexure-A.
4. That the pax is a poor Indian National working in Saudi
Arabia as a painter and holds an Indian Passport bearing
Passport No. K6635077. The pax departed from India on
10.03.2015 and came after more than 11 months on
18.05.2017 and hence the pax fulfill the condition of the
Notification No. 12/2012 dated 17.03.2012 as amended
and therefore eligible to import the gold at concessional
rate of duty i.e. 10%.
5. That there is no question of smuggling and illegality of
goods as the pax purchased the gold bar for his personal
use and the pax is a legitimate owner of the said goods
and holds bill no. 109209, purchased it from shop named
Kanz Al Saharaa For Gold and Jewelry, Riyadh.
ANNEXURE B.
6. That the pax is said to have approached the office of the
Commissioner of Customs, IGI Airport, Terminal-3, New
Delhi on 30.05.1017. wherein he admitted that the bar
belongs to him and said that the said goods may be
released to him as he is ready to pay the custom duty, fine
and penalty. It is also said that the pax waived his right to
have Show Cause notice and personal hearing in the
instant matter. This is because the authorities had
induced the pax about the release of goods after waiver of
SCN and Personal Hearing. The aspect of free will has
been affected by such inducements while giving
statements to the authorities.
7. That the said bar was not apprised by the Jewellery
Appraiser because the pax vide his letter dated
30.05.2017 admitted that the same is 24kt purity. The
value of the bar weighing 250gms comes to Rs.6,5300/-
by taking the value of gold at 400 USD per 10gms at the
conversion rate of Rs.65.30 against 1USD as per
notification No.47/2017- customs(N.T.)dated 15.05.2017
 and Notification No.49/2017 Customs(N.T.) dated
18.05.2017.
8. That the Principles of Natural Justice i.e. right to have a
show cause notice and personal hearing, has not been
provided by the authorities as the Show Cause Notice
mentioned under Section 124 of the Customs Act was not
served to the pax. Show Cause Notice (SCN) is the starting
point of every proceeding which lays down the entire
framework for the proceedings against the party and
should be served at the very first phase of legal
proceedings with utmost care. Issuance of SCN is a
statutory requirement and it is a basic document for
settlement of any dispute. A SCN offers the noticee an
opportunity to submit his oral or written submissions
before the Adjudicating Authority on the charges alleged in
SCN.
9. That the impugned order dated 05.12.2017 contains legal
infirmities in passing the order as well as informing the
pax. The impugned order was received by the pax on
09.01.2018 from the concerned authority which was
shocking to him as the order was passed in such a
scenario that the pax was not even informed about the
grounds and charges under which he is held liable under
the case.
10. That since order dated 05.12.2017 is violative of principles
of Natural Justice and there should not be much delay in
deciding the matter in Appeal the present writ petition has
been filed on the following amongst other grounds.
 GROUNDS

A. Because the withdrawal of name of the son of the

petitioner is arbitrary and against the principles of natural
justice.

B. Because the unfair action of the respondent no.2 is in

violation of fundamental right as guaranteed under Article
14 of the Constitution of India.
C. Because respondent no.2 has issued BAI ID to the
petitioner’s son which is itself a proof of date of birth as it
is issued after confirming the date of birth of a sportsman.

D. Because it is the duty of the respondents that no citizen is

treated in a unfair manner and punished without giving
an opportunity to explain his/her case.

E. Because the SDM, Gram VikasAdhikari and the Gram

Panchayat Adhikari have confirmed that the date of birth
of the petitioner’s son is 01.08.2003.
F. Because the respondent no.1 & 2 have not followed the
circulars and code against age fraud issued by them and
therefore their action is arbitrary and unreasonable more
so when no explanation was sought by the respondent
no.2.
G. Because the findings of the respondent no.3 are wrong
and based on conjectures, surmises and presumptions
with no evidence to substantiate its claim.
H. Because the actions of the respondent no.2 is against the
principle of audialterem partem as no opportunity was
provided by the respondent no.2 to explain its position.

11. That the present writ is being filed against arbitrary and
unreasonable action of the respondents. Further there is
no inordinate delay or laches in filling the present writ
petition.
12. That the petitioners are not left with any other efficacious

remedy except to approach this Hon’ble Court by way of a

writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

for the issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus or any other

order or direction.

13. That the petitioner has not filed any other petition before

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India or before this Hon’ble

Court or in any other High Court on the agitating or

invoking the same or similar facts and grounds.

PRAYER
It is therefore most respectfully prayed that in view of the
facts and circumstances mentioned above, this Hon’ble
Court may kindly be pleased to:

i) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order

or direction thereby directing the Respondent No. 1
&2 to withdraw the email dated 25.09.2017 and
allow the petitioner’s son to continue in training
camp and further participate as a member of Indian
Junior Team for forthcoming championship and
further for future tournaments;
ii) Quash the findings dated 30.09.2016 of the
respondent no.3;
iii) Quash the decision as communicated through email
dated 25.09.2017 issued by the respondent no.2;
iv) Any other order/ relief as this Hon’ble Court may
deem fit may kindly be passed in favour of the
petitioner, in the interest of Justice.

New Delhi
Dated:- 26.09.2017 Sulaiman Mohd Khan
Advocate
Office:- A-446(LGF), Defence Colony
New Delhi-24
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(EXTRAORDINARY WRIT JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

MUKESH YADAV ….….Petitioner

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …Respondents

NOTICE OF MOTION
To,

Standing Counsel,

Ch. No. _____, Delhi High Court,

New Delhi.

Sir,

Please find enclosed herewith a copy of Petition under

Article 226 of Constitution of India moved in the above referred
matter.

The said writ petition is likely to be listed on or around

_________, September 2017.
Please take note. Yours

sincerely,

New Delhi

Dated:-
____.09.2017 Sulaiman Mohd Khan
Advocate
Office:- A-446(LGF), Defence Colony
New Delhi-24
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(EXTRAORDINARY WRIT JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

MUKESH YADAV ….….Petitioner

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …Respondents

INDEX

Sl. No. Particulars Pages Court

Fee

1. Notice of Motion ‘A’

2. Urgent Application 'B' Rs.2.75

3. Memo of parties 'C – D'

4. Synopsis & List of Dates ‘E – F’

5. Writ Petition under Art. 226 of

Constitution of India alongwith affidavits
Rs.
of petitioner.
2.75

6. Annexure 'A'

Copy of the email dated 25.09.2017

alongwith its typed copy.
7. Annexure 'B'

Copy of the reply email dated 26.09.2017

alongwithitsTyped Copy.

8. Annexure-C

Copy of the findings/report dated

30.09.2016 by respondent no.3.

Annexure-D

Copy and its English Translation of the

certificate dated 25.05.2016.

Annexure-E-(Colly)

Copy and typed copy alongwith English

Translation of the report of Gram
Panchayat Adhikarialongwith copy and
typed copy of family register.

Annexure-F

Copy and typed copy of the birth

certificate issued by the registrar of birth
and deaths, Government of U.P.

Annexure-G-(Colly)

Copy of the letter dated 28.09.2015

alongwith its English translation and Date
of Birth certificate issued on 11.07.2016.

Annexure-H

Copy of the status report dated

28.03.2016 by SHO Civil Lines.

Annexure-I-(Colly)

Copy of the circular dated 25.11.2009 and

Code against age fraud in sports.

Application under Section 151 C.P.C for

stay of decision communicated vide email
dated 25.09.2017 and finding dated
30.09.2016alongwith affidavit.

Application under Section 151 C.P.C for

exemption from filling certified copies of
 the annexures alongwith affidavit.

17. Vakalatnama

FILED BY :

New Delhi

Dated:- 26.09.2017 Sulaiman Mohd Khan

Advocate
Office:- A-446(LGF), Defence Colony
New Delhi-24
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(EXTRAORDINARY WRIT JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

MUKESH YADAV ….….Petitioner

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …Respondents

To,

The Registrar,

High Court of Delhi

New Delhi.

URGENT APPLICATION

Sir,

Would you kindly treat the accompanying Petition as an

urgent one as per the Rules & Regulations of Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi. The ground of urgency is that:

THIS IS A PETITION UNDER ARTILE 226 OF CONSTITUTION

OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS.
PETITIONER

New Delhi

Dated:- 26.09.2017 Sulaiman Mohd Khan

Advocate
Office:- A-446(LGF), Defence Colony
New Delhi-24
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(EXTRAORDINARY WRIT JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

MUKESH YADAV ….….Petitioner

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …Respondents

MEMO OF PARTIES

1. MUKESH YADAV

S/o JAGPAL SINGH

R/o VILLAGE HAIBATPUR

TEHSIL DADRI

DISTRICT GAUTAM BUDDH NAGAR

U.P. ….Petitioner

Versus

1. UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH
MINISTRY OF YOUTH AFFAIRS & SPORTS
NIRMAN BHAVAN
NEW DELHI … Respondent No.1

2. BADMINTON ASSOCIATION OF INDIA

THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT
383-384, DOUBLE STOREY
NEW RAJENDER NAGAR
NEW DELHI-60 … Respondent No.2

3. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

 THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR
PLOT NO.5-B, 6TH FLOOR, CGO COMPLEX
LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-03 …Respondent No.3

New Delhi

Dated:- 26.09.2017 Sulaiman Mohd Khan

Advocate
Office:- A-446(LGF), Defence Colony
New Delhi-24
 SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATES

The instant writ petition under Article 226 of constitution

of India seeking a writ of Mandamus thereby directing the

respondents no. 2 to withdraw the email communication dated

25.09.2017 and allow the petitioner’s son to participate in the

forthcoming Championship in Myanmar and represent Indian

Junior Badminton Team and also seeking a writ or order

quashing the finding dated 30.09.2016 of the respondent no.3.

LIST OF DATES & EVENTS

18.05.2017 : Mr. Mohmmad Rustam Khan arrived to IGI

Airport Terminal-3, New Delhi by flight No.
A1 926 where he was intercepted by a
custom officer at the exit gate and diverted
for detailed examination of his baggage
which led to recovery of one yellow metal
bar appearing of gold weighing 250 gm.

The said bar was detained for appraisement

and clearance against which a detention
receipt was provided to the pax.(Annexure
A)

The pax has given the statement that the

bar of gold weighing 250gms (24kt) belong
to him and purchased for his personal use
whose value comes to Rs. 6, 53,000/-.

The pax admitted that the bar was

ingeniously concealed by inside the socks
worn by him.

30.05.2017 : The pax said to have approached the office

of the Commissioner of Customs, IGI
Airport Terminal-3 New Delhi and
submitted a letter admitting that the bar of
gold belongs to him and requested that the
said good may be released to him as he is
ready to pay the custom duty, fine and
 penalty.

It is said that the pax waived his right to

have a show cause notice and personal
hearing.

The said gold bar weighing 250gms was not

apprised by the Jewellery Appraiser as it
was admitted that the same is of 24kt.

05.12.2017 : The Respondent ordered complete

confiscation of the goods i.e. one bar of gold
weighing 250gms (24kt) and imposed a
penalty of Rs. 1, 20,000/- under section
111 and 112 of the Customs Act, 1962
respectively.

07.03.2018 : The petitioner appealed The Commissioner

against the order of Respondent dated
05.12.2018.

.2018 : Hence the writ petition.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(EXTRAORDINARY WRIT JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

MUKESH YADAV ….….Petitioner

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …Respondents

APPLICATION UNDER SEC. 151 C.P.C. FOR

EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPY OF THE
ANNEXURES.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :

1. That the petitioner is filing the accompanying writ petition

and the contents of the said petition may be read as part

and parcel of this application and the same are not being

repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

2. That petitioner annexed the copies and typed copies of the

annexures with the accompanying petition.

3. That petitioner undertakes to produce the same before

this Hon'ble Court as and when directed by this Hon’ble

Court.

In view of above it is most respectfully prayed that the

petitioner may kindly be exempted from filing certified copy of

the annexures in the interest of justice.

New Delhi

Dated:- 26.09.2017 Sulaiman Mohd Khan

Advocate
Office:- A-446(LGF), Defence Colony
New Delhi-24
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(EXTRAORDINARY WRIT JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

MUKESH YADAV ….….Petitioner

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …Respondents

APPLICATION UNDER SEC. 151 C.P.C. FOR STAY OF

DECISION COMMUNICATED THROUGH EMAIL DATED
25.09.2017 AND FINDING DATED 30.09.2017 OF
RESPONDENT NO.3.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :

1. That the instant petition has been filed challenging the

email communication dated 25.09.2017 sent by

respondent no.2 to the petitioner and findings dated

30.09.2016 by the respondent no.3.

2. That the son of the petitioner is presently in Bangalore in

Indian Junior Badminton Team camp preparing for

forthcoming Championship scheduled from 02.10.2017 in

 Myanmar. The decision communicated through email

dated 25.09.2017 has effectively thrown out the

petitioner’s son from the training camp and forthcoming

championship. The aforesaid decision is based on a

finding dated 30.09.2016 arrived at by respondent no.3

and therefore if decision dated 25.09.2017 withdrawing

the name of the petitioner’s son from the Indian Junior

Team and finding of respondent no.3 dated 30.09.2016

are not stayed, the petitioner’s son years of hard work may

go waste and a promising sportsman career will be

wasted. Therefore the petitioner vide this application seeks

the indulgence of the Hon’ble Court seeking and praying

stay of the both the aforesaid decision dated 25.09.2017

and 30.09.2016 till the pendency of the present petition.

3. The contents of the accompanying writ petition may be

read as part and parcel of the instant application as they

have not been repeated for the sake of brevity.

PRAYER

It is therefore most respectfully prayed that in view of the

facts and circumstances mentioned above, this Hon’ble
Court may kindly be pleased to:
a) Stay the decision as communicated by email dated
25.09.2017 till the final disposal of the present petition.
b) Direct the respondents to allow the petitioner’s son
participate in the training camp and forthcoming
championship in Myanmar starting from 02.10.2017.
c) Stay the finding dated 30.09.2016 by the respondent no.3
till the final disposal of the present petition.
 d) Any other order/ relief as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit
may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner, in the
interest of Justice.

New Delhi

Dated:- 26.09.2017 Sulaiman Mohd Khan

Advocate
Office:- A-446(LGF), Defence Colony
New Delhi-24